Armed forces throughout the world rely on well trained men and women to protect their countries from harm. Such training varies widely among the different military branches, but until recently, such training has essentially involved one of two extremes, either highly advanced simulations, or hands-on, real-world training.
This training divide exists for several reasons. One such reason is that the cost of developing simulated training environments is typically significantly higher than the real-world training. For example, according to statistics compiled in 2001, it costs the United States Army approximately $35,000 to train a new infantry recruit using traditional training methods. When this is compared to the cost of developing and deploying an infantry simulator, which could easily cost tens of millions of dollars, it is typically seen as more cost effective to provide traditional, hands-on training. The exception to this is in the aviation and maritime realms, where each real-world aircraft or watercraft can easily cost tens of millions of dollars, and training a pilot can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. In such instances, developing simulators that allowed entry-level pilots to gain experience without entering the cockpit or bridge of a real aircraft or watercraft has proven to be a much more cost-effective training approach than risking the lives and safety of valuable instructors, trainees, and equipment.
Another reason for the training divide is that most infantry-related tasks require maneuvering. Unlike pilots, who sit in a relatively static, fixed-dimension cockpit or bridge, infantry and other service members are required to move around a much broader area. For example, an infantry training exercise may involve securing a building in a city. Where the simulation begins at the outskirts of the city, the recruit must be able to navigate the city and find the appropriate building, enter it, and secure it. Such interactions have heretofore required awkward interfaces that tended to be distracting, and have not allowed the recruits to be fully immersed in the simulation. Thus, traditional, hands-on training has traditionally been preferred for infantry recruits.
While traditional, hands-on, real-world training has traditionally been preferred for training infantry recruits, such training has its disadvantages. For example, it is often difficult to simulate the various environmental, structural, and linguistic differences experienced in different theaters. By contrast, a simulated training environment can readily allow a recruit to experience these differences.